5.2.2. Coors contends that the Puerto Rico courts impermissibly refuse to consider legislative history in determining whether a law has a constitutionally discriminatory purpose, thus hindering Coors from presenting claims. Family Winemakers vs. Jenkins is then cited

5.3.1. In the case, the sales tax satellite providers had to pay were discriminatory in effect because similarly-situated entities like cable companies, which were in-state, didn't have to pay the same taxes, thus conferring an advantage upon cable services. Family Winemakers vs. Jenkins is then cited

6. Why it Matters

6.1. This case matters because business owners should not have to operate at a competitive disadvantage due to discriminatory laws in place

6.1.1. Florida's tax laws have been altered in a case involving DirecTV, which ruled in their favor, after the laws in place were found to be discriminatory and impacted similar companies, in this case cable operators, disproportionately by burdening out-of-state satellite competitors

6.1.1.1. As a result of the court finding in favor of DirecTV, business practices have been altered since satellite companies can now operate in Florida without a competitive disadvantage by paying more in taxes vs in-state competitors who are cable operators

6.1.2. A situation similar to that of Winemakers vs. Jenkins happened in the state of Illinois whereby the states system prevented out-of-state beer brewers from competing on equal terms with in-state brewers, thus violating the Commerce Clause

6.1.2.1. The courts found in favor of the plaintiff so Illinois may no longer permit in-state brewers to distribute their products directly to retailers without affording out-of-state brewers the same ability

6.2. Operating at a disadvantage due to law hurts the company's product or service which hurts consumers since their product or service choices and quality are diminished